Newsletter

Editorial: Colson contract required more transparency

Topeka City Manager Jim Colson, shown here at a Community Night Out Against Crime event in his first weeks in Topeka, received a five-year extension of his contract Tuesday night.

Every member of the Topeka City Council indicated Tuesday they wanted to retain the services of city manager Jim Colson.

When it came time to vote on amending and extending Colson’s contract, however, three council members voted no for various reasons, including transparency. The same three council members — Karen Hiller, John Campos and Sylvia Ortiz — had earlier voted against adding the contract extension to the evening’s agenda.

The size of the pay increase Colson will receive and the length of the contract, through Aug. 27, 2019, also drew criticism from the three dissenting council members, but it is the transparency issue that is of primary concern today.

Hiller, Campos and Ortiz said they weren’t ready to vote on the contract because they had received it less than an hour before they were expected to vote on it. The process, they said, lacked transparency.

They are absolutely right about the process lacking transparency, and there was no reason to rush the deal to a vote. In the spirit of transparency, council members should have voted to place it on their agenda for next week’s meeting, giving Topeka residents time to discuss the issue with their council representatives if they desired.

But responsibility for the lack of transparency doesn’t rest only with the six council members who voted to proceed with the vote Tuesday and then voted to approve the contract. Councilman Chad Manspeaker noted the amendments to Colson’s contract were the subject of three executive sessions conducted in accordance with the Kansas Open Meetings Act.

That means all council members knew what was in the works. Although there are some things best left in executive session, there is nothing in KOMA to prevent council members from discussing issues pondered during executive sessions with constituents and getting their feedback.

A lack of transparency on such issues is a good way to lose the public’s trust.